Blog
High Seas Treaty: A Major Step Forward for a Healthy, Resilient Ocean
The world is celebrating a key milestone for keeping our oceans healthy and resilient for present and future generations.This month, the final requirement was met for the entry into force of the High Seas Treaty—a long-sought agreement that is essential for the protection and sustainable use of two-thirds of the ocean, nearly half of our blue planet.The high seas are areas beyond national jurisdiction and one of the largest reservoirs of biodiversity on Earth, home to an incredible variety of marine life. They also provide food and oxygen, regulate the climate, buffer the impacts of the climate crisis, and support the livelihoods of communities that rely on fishing and tourism.After more than 20 years of discussions and over five years of formal negotiations, governments agreed on the text of the treaty at the United Nations headquarters on March 4, 2023. The treaty was formally adopted on June 19 of that year.But that was not the end of the story.For the treaty to enter into force and be implemented, it needed to be ratified by at least 60 countries—a milestone that was finally reached on September 19. The treaty will officially take effect 120 days later, on January 17, 2026.At AIDA, we have contributed to this process for many years, helping ensure that the needs of Latin America are part of both the treaty’s design and its implementation.The High Seas Treaty—short for the Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement)—offers numerous benefits. Among them, it calls for the creation and proper management of marine protected areas on the high seas to conserve and restore the ocean’s rich biodiversity.The treaty also requires that any new activity on the high seas undergo environmental impact assessments, including consideration of the cumulative effects of multiple activities on a single ecosystem.AIDA’s Role in Protecting Life on the High SeasFrom the negotiation of the High Seas Treaty to the present day, AIDA has played an active role in the process, co-leading Latin American civil society contributions to help secure a strong and effective agreement.We have done this as part of the High Seas Alliance, a coalition of more than 70 organizations working to preserve biodiversity in the high seas, where AIDA serves as regional coordinator for Latin America. In this role, we have ensured that the realities, expectations, and challenges of the continent are incorporated into the Alliance’s strategies.During the treaty negotiations, we supported Latin American delegations through internal and regional processes, providing briefings on the benefits and obligations of the agreement. In doing so, we helped strengthen the region’s capacity to engage effectively, drawing on our scientific and technical expertise.Looking ahead to implementation, we have also provided technical support to regional delegations participating in the Preparatory Committee sessions, a United Nations body tasked with advancing the issues that will be addressed at the treaty’s first Conference of the Parties (COP).Countries that ratify the treaty will be able to participate in the COP, where key decisions will be made regarding implementation and the activation of the treaty’s benefits. The first COP session will take place one year after the treaty enters into force.Beyond this much-anticipated ratification, it is essential that all countries—not just the initial 60—join the agreement to ensure fair, equitable, and sustainable governance of high seas biodiversity. This will guarantee effective implementation, fulfillment of conservation objectives, and participation in the treaty’s benefits.At AIDA, we will continue working with a Latin American focus to ensure that the High Seas Treaty translates into concrete actions for the protection and sustainable use of the high seas—a shared responsibility of all governments.
Read more
The Ocean-Climate Link: 5 Things to Know
Por Víctor Quintanilla y Natalia Oviedo*Although the ocean is essential for stabilizing the planet's climate, it is rarely the focus of attention when we talk about the global climate crisis.The ocean is our best ally in the face of the climate emergency because it absorbs much of the greenhouse gases that humanity emits and that are the source of the problem.At the same time, the ocean is a victim of the climate crisis, whose impacts are pushing it to the limit with acidification of its waters, rising sea levels, and loss of oxygen, processes that seriously affect marine life.Despite its importance, the relationship between the ocean and climate has not been fully included in international negotiations in which governments seek agreements and policies to address the climate crisis.Faced with this gap and in a historic breakthrough, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea issued a ruling in 2024 clarifying the obligations of States to protect the marine environment from the climate crisis.Below, we present five keys to understanding the link between the ocean and climate.1. The role of the ocean in the climate crisis.According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the ocean is “a fundamental climate regulator on timescales ranging from seasonal to millennial.” Since 1955, it has absorbed 90 percent of the excess heat caused by global warming, along with a quarter of the carbon dioxide released by human activities.Ocean currents transport warm water from the tropics to the poles, sending colder water back. This balances the temperature and makes much of the Earth habitable. The ocean influences climate variations on land by being the main source of rain, which feeds rivers and other vital freshwater systems.The ocean is known as a lung for the planet because, through microscopic organisms known as phytoplankton, it is responsible for generating approximately half of the world's oxygen supply. In turn, coastal ecosystems such as mangroves, marshes, and seagrass beds absorb enormous amounts of carbon from the atmosphere, mitigating the climate crisis. 2. The impact of the climate crisis on the ocean.The climate crisis alters the physical and chemical properties of the ocean, affecting its ability to regulate the climate. One of the irreversible impacts of climate change is ocean warming, whose rate and heat absorption has more than doubled since 1993. As its waters warm, they begin to release carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere.In addition, rising ocean temperatures are expected to reduce the amount of oxygen available, altering nutrient cycles and thereby affecting fish distribution and abundance. Another consequence is sea level rise, which is due to thermal expansion of the ocean and loss of land ice.Finally, the absorption of increasing amounts of carbon dioxide has resulted in ocean acidification, understood as a decrease in pH. This reduces calcium levels, a substance necessary for the shells and external skeletons of various species of marine fauna and ecosystems such as coral reefs.3. The inclusion of the ocean in international climate negotiations.Although the link between the ocean and climate change has been recognized since the beginning of negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)—by including the ocean in the definition of “climate system”—its presence in these negotiations has been gradual. A decisive milestone occurred at the 25th UN Climate Change Conference (COP25) in 2019, where the first official dialogue on the subject was called for, resulting in recommendations to align climate and ocean action, while also promoting the mobilization of financing to protect marine ecosystems. Since then, the ocean has earned a permanent place on the climate agenda. At subsequent conferences, the inclusion of the ocean was further expanded. The Glasgow Climate Pact (COP26, 2021) recognized the ocean as an ally in carbon absorption, called for the integration of ocean-based action into UNFCCC work plans, and mandated an annual dialogue on the topic. At COP27 (2022), countries were encouraged to include ocean-based action in their nationally determined contributions (NDCs). And at COP28 (2023), the ocean was included in the first global stocktake of the Paris Agreement.Ahead of this year's COP30 in Brazil, which will have a specific agenda on “Forests, Oceans, and Biodiversity,” the challenge is to move from political recognition to the implementation of concrete actions to protect the ocean.4. States' obligations to protect the ocean in the face of the climate crisis.The health and resilience of the ocean is essential not only for addressing the climate crisis, but also for the exercise of fundamental human rights such as life, health, culture, food, access to water, and the right to a healthy environment. This highlights the interdependence between the ocean, climate change, and human rights.Recognizing this link, on May 21, 2024, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea issued an important decision clarifying the obligations of States to preserve the ocean in the face of the climate crisis. These duties include adopting concrete mitigation measures to minimize the release of toxic substances into the marine environment, as well as exercising strict due diligence to ensure that non-state actors effectively comply with such measures.The tribunal emphasized the obligations of states to prevent climate change-related pollution that affects other states and the marine environment outside national jurisdiction. In relation to the right to a healthy environment, the ruling emphasizes the use of precautionary and ecosystem approaches in the context of states' obligations to conduct environmental and socioeconomic impact assessments of any activity that may cause marine pollution related to climate change. This includes that, in the face of the possibility of serious or irreversible damage to the marine environment, the lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as an excuse to delay protective measures.5. Some key actions to protect our ocean and, with it, the climate.Effective protection of our ocean requires the commitment of governments, which must act at the national and international levels to prioritize its health. These include:Prioritizing concrete measures that integrate the ocean into climate mitigation and adaptation actions. Among the most effective are the protection and restoration of ecosystems, especially those that, in addition to capturing and storing enormous amounts of carbon, protect coastlines and maintain vital ecosystem services (mangroves, marshes, seagrass beds, coastal wetlands, and coral reefs, among others).Ensuring the protection and sustainable use of biodiversity in the ocean area beyond national jurisdiction. This involves the effective implementation of the High Seas Treaty, which will enter into force on January 17, 2026, as well as its ratification by countries that have not yet done so, to ensure fair, equitable, and sustainable governance.Defending the deep sea from mining. This requires imposing moratoriums on deep-sea mining activities on the grounds that there is insufficient technical and scientific information to prevent, control, and mitigate the potential impacts on the biological diversity of unknown ecosystems in deep waters and on the seabed.Protect the rights of coastal and island communities, which depend on fishing and local tourism for their livelihoods. These populations face increasing impacts from the climate crisis and multiple environmental pressures. Governments have a responsibility to ensure their resilience and well-being by safeguarding the marine and coastal biodiversity that sustains their ways of life and culture.Acknowledging the link between the ocean and climate, and translating it into concrete and effective measures, is essential to protect and maintain the balance of both life systems.This is what will guarantee the health of marine and coastal biodiversity, our food security, and, ultimately, a future for the planet.* Víctor Quintanilla is AIDA's Content Coordinator; Natalia Oviedo is a Costa Rican international lawyer and former intern at the organization.
Read more
Circular economy: what is it and what role does it play regarding the climate crisis and energy transition?
Life on the planet, including our own, depends on nature.To create more sustainable ways of life and keep global warming under control, we need to ensure healthy, resilient, and productive ecosystems.The climate crisis, as well as the pollution and biodiversity loss crises, stem from human activities that exploit nature beyond its limits, without giving it a chance to recover, degrading ecosystems and pushing them to points of “no return.”These activities are based on the conventional economic model, which is linear and follows the logic of extracting, producing, using, and discarding resources.A more sustainable use of natural resources requires a different economic model.One option among many is the circular economy, an economic model of production and consumption traditionally described as a combination of reduction, reuse, and recycling activities.However, most current approaches to the circular economy, incorporated into various public policies, focus on extending the life cycle of products that have already been manufactured. They do not comprehensively incorporate the processes of extracting the materials needed to manufacture the products or their final disposal. This considerably reduces the protection of nature and territories during the economic cycle.That is why it is important to understand what the circular economy is and what it should include, in theory and in practice, so that it can truly contribute to a more sustainable and fair world. Circular economy: Definition and challengesAs an alternative to the linear economic system, the circular economy involves closing the economic cycle through various mechanisms. These include reducing the use of virgin natural resources, increasing the use of recycled materials, and minimizing waste through the repair and reuse of products, keeping them in circulation for as long as possible.It also means creating additional value for products whose useful life has ended when their materials are used again and again. In the face of our continued and unsustainable use of resources, the concept of the circular economy is becoming increasingly prevalent in different areas.Although it is a living and evolving concept, when it becomes public policy, most definitions of the circular economy consider its main objective to be economic prosperity, with environmental care as a secondary result.In 2020, a legal definition of the circular economy in the European Union considered it to be “aneconomic system whereby the value of products, materials and other resources in the economy is maintained for as long as possible, enhancing their efficient use in production and consumption, thereby reducing the environmental impact of their use, minimising waste and the release of hazardous substances at all stages of their life cycle” …This and other definitions show that the positive effects of the circular economy on nature tend to be taken for granted, when certain theories or practices associated with the concept may actually hinder the protection of ecosystems and the people who depend on them.This is happening with the type of circular economy promoted to make extractive processes linked to the energy transition, designed to address the climate crisis, environmentally friendly. Circular economy and energy transitionHistorically, extractive activities such as mining have degraded ecosystems and violated human rights in Latin America, creating so-called “sacrifice zones.”Today, to address the climate crisis, several international organizations have positioned an energy transition that requires doubling the production of renewable energies and electromobility to decarbonize the global energy matrix.This also implies intensifying the extraction of so-called "critical" minerals for the development of clean technologies. One of these is lithium, a mineral of which the region has large reserves.Thus, far from putting an end to it, the energy transition promoted by the Global North is renewing the historical extractivist trend, generating great pressure on Latin American territories rich in minerals for the transition, affecting ecosystems and populations near extraction areas.In this context, the circular economy is promoted as a tool to make mining an environmentally responsible process. However, international proposals in this regard do not guarantee the resilience of ecosystems or the well-being of communities.This is evident in countries such as Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile due to the growing global demand for minerals such as lithium.Currently, the circular economy applied to mining in Latin America focuses on the internal processes of mining companies, but not on the consequences that their interactions with ecosystems and communities generate in the extraction territories, without stopping the expansion of extractivism or the high socio-environmental impacts caused.Obtaining lithium for electromobility, for example, involves a complex, transnational supply chain. This includes mineral extraction, refining, the production of electrodes for batteries, battery manufacturing, and finally, the manufacture of electric vehicles.From a global northern perspective, the circular economy is mainly applied here to battery recycling and industrial improvements for mining. However, it does not include measures to protect the biophysical limits and resilience of the ecosystems where lithium is extracted, ensure environmental restoration, prevent damage to local economies, guarantee human rights, and repair those that have already been violated. Proposals from Latin America for a just circular economyTo ensure that the energy transition does not become a new extractive process that generates the same conflicts and environmental impacts that it has systematically caused and that are precursors to the current climate crisis, it is essential that the circular economy comprehensively integrates the mineral extraction territories.Circular economy schemes must avoid the creation, expansion, and/or deepening of “sacrifice zones.” They must also recognize the strategic value of ecosystems as natural capital for countries and communities, given the ecosystem functions they provide, including freshwater supply and carbon capture.To move towards a just circular economy in the extraction territories, the following principles must be respected:Protection of the human rights of local populations, guaranteeing their permanence in the territory and the continuity of their economic activities, linked to their livelihoods and their relationship with ecosystems.Promotion of environmental balance in accordance with the biophysical limits of ecosystems, recognizing their intrinsic values, which favor the conservation of their functions.Internalization of environmental costs in mineral value chains, incorporating the value of ecosystem services used for extraction into prices.Learn more in our policy brief Reimagining the circular economy from the extraction territories. Proposals from Latin America.
Read more
The Inter-American Court's Opinion: 7 reasons it matters for climate justice
On July 3, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights released its long-awaited Advisory Opinion No. 32 (OC-32), clarifying the scope of States' obligations in the face of the climate crisis – including, among other responsibilities, the duty to guarantee the right to a healthy climate.This marks the first time that a regional human rights court has made a broad and comprehensive statement on the issue of climate change.The opinion was issued in response to a request submitted by the governments of Chile and Colombia in January 2023. It is also the outcome of an unprecedented participatory process within the Inter-American Human Rights System, in which dozens of States, civil society organizations, Indigenous peoples, activists, and academics engaged through oral statements in public hearings and a record number of written submissions.Below are seven reasons why this landmark decision — written in and for Latin America — represents a turning point for climate justice in the region and beyond. 1. Clarifying States’ legal obligations in the face of the climate emergencyIn its decision, the Court affirms that the world is currently experiencing a climate emergency—a crisis driven by human activities, unequally generated by different States, and one that progressively and severely impacts people, especially those in vulnerable situations.In response, the Court underscores that States have binding legal obligations—not merely voluntary commitments—to confront this emergency with “urgent and effective actions, articulate, with a human rights perspective, and under the prism of resilience.” This means that, amid the climate emergency, States are required to respect and guarantee human rights. 2. Recognizing the human right to a healthy climateFor the first time, the Court explicitly recognizes the autonomous human right to a healthy climate, derived from the broader right to a healthy environment. This recognition establishes that States must protect the ability of both present and future generations to live in a climate system free from dangerous human-caused interference.Protecting this right—which underpins the enjoyment of other human rights—also requires honoring the principle of intergenerational equity. In practice, this means that States must act today to ensure that future generations inherit conditions of environmental stability that allow for equal opportunities for well-being and development. 3. Strengthened protection for people in vituations of VulnerabilityAdvisory Opinion No. 32 establishes that States must ensure that individuals and groups in situations of particular vulnerability — including women, children, Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendant communities, peasant and fishing communities, older adults, persons with disabilities, LGBTIQ+ individuals, and human rights defenders, among others — are able to exercise their rights on equal terms in the face of climate impacts.The Court also recognizes that certain territories in the Americas — such as the Amazon, the Insular Territories, and Caribbean States — are especially vulnerable to the effects of climate change. 4. Emissions control and regulation of business activitiesAccording to the opinion, States are required to set clear greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation targets and maintain an up-to-date mitigation strategy grounded in human rights. They must also tighten and rigorously regulate both public and private activities that produce GHG emissions.In line with these mitigation strategies, States must determine which projects or activities require an environmental impact assessment that explicitly evaluates potential climate impacts. 5. Protecting human rights within the energy transitionAdvisory Opinion No. 32 underscores that States must safeguard human rights from potential violations linked to the extraction of minerals and other resources necessary for the energy transition.The Court also affirms that States are obligated to ensure the fair distribution of both the burdens of climate action and the impacts of climate change. This includes avoiding disproportionate burdens on certain populations — for example, in how the costs of the energy transition are allocated. 6. Recognition of traditional knowledge in climate actionThe opinion recognizes local, traditional, and Indigenous knowledge as protected under Inter-American human rights treaties and as a key part of the best available science. This recognition opens new avenues for demanding the inclusion of such knowledge in climate solutions.The Court thus reaffirms that the right to science also encompasses the intellectual and practical contributions that Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendant communities, and other local groups have sustained and safeguarded over generations. 7. Advancing the global movement for climate justiceThis decision reinforces and builds upon earlier rulings, such as the one issued in May 2024 by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, which clarified States’ obligations to protect the marine environment from the effects of the climate crisis. It also contributes to ongoing global legal efforts — including the forthcoming Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice, which will further define States’ responsibilities in the face of the global climate emergency.Together, these decisions are strengthening the global movement for climate justice, as well as supporting citizen demand for stronger government action.
Read more
The natural wonders we could protect with the High Seas Treaty
For decades, the ocean has protected us from the impacts of climate change, absorbing 90 percent of the excess heat produced by global warming. It’s given us food and the genetic resources we use to produce life-saving drugs. As if that weren’t enough, it’s enabled millions of families to thrive in an economy based on its bounty.Despite its importance, the ocean remains unprotected in large part; no country governs the high seas, international waters that comprise 64 percent of the ocean’s total surface area. Management measures have given rise to a patchwork of uncoordinated protections.To fill this gap, in June 2023, UN member countries formally adopted an agreement to protect biodiversity in the high seas, which requires ratification by at least 60 countries to enter into force.The High Seas Treaty - short name for the Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) - proposes, among other aspects, the creation and adequate management of marine protected areas (MPAs) in the high seas, regions that would allow for the conservation and rescue of the rich biodiversity found in the ocean. Protection at a high costIn addition to absorbing a large part of the planet’s excess heat, the ocean absorbs nearly 30 percent of all greenhouse gases, which are responsible for climate change.But this protective role comes with serious consequences. By interacting with and absorbing pollutants such as carbon dioxide, the ocean suffers from acidification - a phenomenon that reduces the levels of calcium, an element necessary for the shells and external skeletons of several species of marine fauna - and loss of oxygen, essential for life under the sea.These impacts consequently affect the food supply and employment in the fishing and tourism industries.Faced with the impacts of the climate crisis on marine ecosystems, governments must do much more to protect the ocean, starting with ratifying the High Seas Treaty, which establishes a clear legal framework and process for maintaining its health and resilience. Protected natural wondersAs the ratification of the High Seas Treaty progresses, there is growing interest from governments and civil society to lay the groundwork for greater protection of the high seas.As part of this push, areas of high ecological value have been identified that could form the first wave of protection once the treaty goes into effect. High Seas Alliance - a coalition of organizations of which AIDA is a member - has highlighted 8 priority sites that could be part of this first generation of MPAs, which it has called the Hidden Natural Wonders of the World:Salas y Gómez and Nazca Ridges: Deep in the waters of the southeastern Pacific, these two unique chains of submarine slopes and peaks are separated from South America by the waters of the Humboldt Current and the enormous chasm of the Atacama Trench. They are critical habitats and migratory corridors for at least 82 threatened or endangered species, along with many others of ecological and economic importance.The Termal Dome: Each year in the eastern tropical Pacific, strong seasonal winds push warm waters from the coast offshore, where they meet cooler waters carried by ocean currents. This interaction causes a unique upwelling system that brings cold, nutrient-rich waters to the sea surface, benefiting many species.Emperor Seamounts: Located in the North Pacific, this chain of more than 80 seamounts extends for 2,000 kilometers on the seafloor between the northwesternmost point of the Hawaiian Islands and the Kuril-Kamchatka Trench (Pacific Northwest). Its nutrient-rich waters feed a great diversity of species. And in the mountains, a range of corals and sponges shelter countless species of fish and invertebrates.Walvis Ridge: It is a range of seamounts that extends for about 3,000 kilometers off the coast of southwestern Namibia to the mid-Atlantic ridge (submarine ridge that runs along the Atlantic Ocean). It is composed of several seafloor types and includes many features of the deep ocean floor, along with its abyssal plains, seamounts and guyots (seamounts).Sargasso Sea: It is the only sea in the world without land borders. It is geographically defined by four Atlantic Ocean currents in an area of about 1,100 kilometers wide and 3,200 kilometers long. It is called the “golden rainforest of the high seas” because of the sargassum algae that float on its surface and provide habitat for a myriad of species, while absorbing and storing carbon and producing oxygen.South Tasman Sea: Located between Australia and New Zealand, it is a diverse and dynamic area that supports abundant marine life. It is also an important breeding area and migratory corridor for a large number of species, including endangered species such as the Antipodean albatross, which often transit its waters.The Lost City: It is a complex of 30 hydrothermal vent chimneys located on the upper slopes of the Atlantis seamount massif in the North Atlantic Ocean. The complex of vents rises 4,300 meters from the seafloor, with peaks at a depth of 750 meters. The Lost City chimneys are believed to be more than 120,000 years old.Saya de Malha: Located in the heart of the Indian Ocean, midway between the Seychelles and Mauritius, this unique seascape is home to the world’s largest seagrass community. It is a rare example of seagrass meadows on the high seas and the largest submerged ocean bank in the world, covering more than 40,000 square kilometers.Preserving these natural wonders through marine protected areas requires the entry into force of the High Seas Treaty.It is time to take care of the ocean as it takes care of us.
Read more
Motagua River: A story of contamination and a call for justice
The Motagua River, Guatemala's largest river, is severely polluted with sewage, solid waste, and other types of waste.It flows into the Caribbean Sea, so contamination reaches those waters, as well as the Mesoamerican Barrier Reef System - the world's largest transboundary reef - and the Honduran coast, causing unquantifiable social and environmental damage.Polluting activities occur throughout the river basin, including sub-basins and micro-basins.In general terms, the contamination has deteriorated the health and violated the right to water, development and a healthy environment of all the people living in the basin.The contamination of the Motagua is a problem that has been going on for decades and requires urgent long-term measures that contribute to the sanitation and integrated management of the river basin.Where is the Motagua River?The Motagua River is one of the main rivers in Guatemala. With a length of 486 km, it crosses 96 municipalities and 14 departments of the country. It originates in Quiché, a department located in the northwest, and flows into the Caribbean Sea.It is at its mouth that its flow meets the Mesoamerican Reef, which extends for approximately 1,000 km and covers the territorial waters of Belize, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico. Thus, the pollution carried by the river deteriorates the health of the reef system, which is home to the second longest barrier reef in the world.The Mesoamerican Reef protects thousands of kilometers of coastline from currents, waves and storms. In addition to being a breeding and feeding ground for a great diversity of species, it is a carbon dioxide sink and a detoxifier of water and air. The ecological and economic health of the entire South Atlantic area depends on its conservation.In addition, pollution from the Motagua River reaches the coast of Honduras and spreads to Amatique Bay, located along the eastern coast of Guatemala and Belize. This is clearly a transboundary problem.Where does the pollution in of the Motagua River come from?The largest volume of contamination of the Motagua River comes from Guatemala City, the capital of the country, mainly through the waters of the Las Vacas River, which receives a large amount of solid waste from the Chinautla River, as well as sewage that is discharged into its waters on a daily basis.Solid waste from the Chinautla River, which flows through the municipality of the same name, comes from a landfill located in Zone 3 of the capital. Any small landslide in this landfill generates waste that is automatically dumped into the river at any time of the year.The pollution that the Chinautla river carries also consists of a large amount of sewage, generated by at least 500,000 people living in the northern part of Guatemala City, which does not receive any previous cleaning treatment.In the municipality of Chinautla there are numerous illegal landfills. In addition, many private vehicles and collection trucks dump waste on the banks of the Chinautla and Las Vacas rivers.According to data from the Integrated Environmental Management of the Motagua River Basin project, financed by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), it is estimated that 66% of urban solid waste in Guatemala is not collected and there is no guarantee that the remaining 34% is properly disposed of. In addition, of the total number of landfills in the country, 88.32% are illegal or do not have municipal authorization.Most of the waste is dumped in streams and/or on surfaces that are susceptible to dragging, ending up in one way or another in water sources, such as the Motagua basin.In other words, the main source of contamination of the Motagua River is the poor management of solid waste and water resources in the country; the lack of compliance with existing regulations on wastewater discharge, disposal and treatment of waste and solid waste; as well as the lack of a water law.Who is affected by the contamination of the Motagua River?The contamination of the Motagua River affects the entire population of Guatemala. In the lower basin, it directly affects people dedicated to fishing, who have seen their catches reduced.And, by harming tourism in the Caribbean, it also affects the communities that depend on tourism for their livelihoods.As a basin-wide problem, the contamination of the Motagua affects those living in the main sub-basins and micro-basins of the river, including the indigenous communities of the Mayan Poqomam people in the cities of Chuarrancho and Chinautla.In Chinautla, the contamination affects the living conditions, health, environment, water sources, economy and culture of more than 18,000 people.The restoration of the Motagua River is crucial to improve the quality of life of at least 30% of the Guatemalan population, as well as those affected in neighboring countries.Actions to rescue the Motagua River from contaminationIn the face of the serious degradation of Guatemala's largest river basin, the damage to key ecosystems such as the Mesoamerican Reef, and the human rights violations that pollution generates, urgent measures are required, among them:Verify compliance with environmental and municipal regulations, as well as prevent and halt environmental damage at the source through regulation, monitoring, supervision and oversight of activities that affect the rights of the inhabitants of the Motagua River basin.Strengthen regulations related to wastewater disposal and solid waste management so that they are implemented in a timely manner through complete treatment systems in the municipalities of the basin.Initiate actions to enable the socio-environmental restoration of affected ecosystems throughout the basin, including political, legislative and administrative measures to strengthen the legal system and allocate sufficient financial resources to ensure the protection of waters and territories.
Read more
The treaty protecting life on the high seas: Why should governments ratify it?
The ocean covers two-thirds of the planet. It is so immense and vast that 64% of its waters are outside any border, in a space known as the high seas.It is an area that lies outside national jurisdictions and represents 40% of the Earth's surface.Because of the wealth of marine life it harbors - including species new to science - the high seas are one of the world's greatest reserves of biodiversity. It is also a source of food and oxygen, regulates the climate, cushions the impacts of the climate crisis and sustains the livelihoods of fishing and tourism communities.Despite their importance, only 1.2% of the waters of the high seas have international protection.To fill this gap, in June 2023, UN member countries formally adopted an agreement to protect biodiversity in the high seas, which needs ratification by at least 60 countries to enter into force.Find out how many and which countries have ratified the treaty. As a reservoir of global common goods, the protection and sustainable use of the high seas is a right and an obligation of all governments. What does the High Seas Treaty state?The High Seas Treaty - short name for the Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) - is universal and can benefit all countries, even those that are not party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), such as Colombia, El Salvador, Peru and Venezuela.The treaty contains the following key elements:Area-based management tools. The treaty establishes a legal framework and a clear process for creating networks of marine protected areas, which can provide comprehensive protection for biodiversity in the high seas from multiple activities, maintaining the health and resilience of this part of the ocean.Environmental impact assessments. Under the treaty, any new activity on the high seas is subject to detailed, modern environmental impact assessments that include the cumulative impacts of multiple activities affecting the same ecosystem. Developing countries will be supported to take part in this task.Fair and equitable sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources. The agreement establishes obligations to share monetary and non-monetary benefits from the utilization of genetic resources found in the high seas (genetic material of any animal, plant or microbe) to develop new medicines, for example.Capacity building and technology transfer. The treaty provides for the provision of financing and technology transfer on fair terms for developing countries to increase their marine scientific and technological capacity, including data exchange, infrastructure development and improvement, and respect for traditional knowledge. Why should governments ratify the High Seas Treaty?Having a High Seas Treaty took more than two decades, including five years of negotiations at the UN. To secure this historic breakthrough, the agreement must enter into force - become law under international law - which will occur 120 days after 60 countries have ratified it. So far, 28 countries have ratified the treaty.Ratification means that countries, in addition to signing it, give their formal consent to the treaty, which often involves ensuring that their national laws are consistent with it.There are many reasons why ratification of the agreement will benefit developing countries, particularly those in Latin America and the Caribbean. Some of these are:The treaty brings us closer to environmental justice. It will benefit countries historically excluded from access to the resources of the high seas, providing them with new opportunities for technological, scientific and economic development. It will also allow all countries to be active players in a global platform for decision-making, coordination and cooperation for the protection and sustainable use of these resources.The treaty allows for the conservation of key ecosystems. Under the treaty, all countries will be able to propose marine protected areas on the high seas, including landlocked countries (such as Bolivia and Paraguay). This will allow the protection of areas rich in biodiversity and endemic species in Latin America, such as the Salas y Gómez & Nazca submarine mountain ranges (Chile-Peru) or the Thermal Dome in the Central American Pacific.The treaty benefits local livelihoods and economies. By promoting a healthy and resilient high seas, the treaty will have positive effects on coastal areas and economic activities that depend on migratory species, such as whale and turtle watching, diving, tourism, commercial and sport fishing. Highly migratory species such as squid are vital to Latin American economies.The treaty provides a voice in decision-making on the high seas. Countries that have signed the treaty will participate in the meetings of the Preparatory Commission and those that ratify it will be able to participate in the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the agreement, the first version of which will take place one year after its entry into force, where key aspects of its implementation and the realization of its benefits will be decided.The call is therefore for all countries to ratify the High Seas Treaty, thus protecting 64% of our ocean, which today lacks effective protection.It is time to act for marine life and for future generations.
Read more
Why is lithium mining in Andean salt flats also called water mining?
By Víctor Quintanilla, David Cañas and Javier Oviedo* According to official figures, approximately 2.2 billion people worldwide lack access to drinking water.Despite this panorama, threats to this common good from overexploitation and pollution are increasing. One such threat is the accelerated extraction of lithium in Latin American countries, driven by corporate and state actors to meet the energy transition needs of the global North.Lithium extraction involves enormous water consumption and loss and is essentially water mining.On the continent, the advance of the lithium industry particularly threatens the salt flats and other Andean wetlands of the Gran Atacama region—located in the ecological region of the Puna, on the border of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile—where more than 53 percent of the mineral’s resources (potentially exploitable material) are located.Lithium mining exacerbates the natural water deficit in the area, threatening not only the salt flats, but also the many forms of life that live there. Where does the water used in lithium mining come from?First, it’s necessary to point out that salt flats are aquatic ecosystems located at the bottom of endorheic or closed basins. There, rivers do not flow into the sea but into the interior of the territory, so the water forms lakes or lagoons often accompanied by salt flats due to evaporation.In the salt flats, freshwater and saltwater usually coexist in a delicate balance that allows life to survive.The regions with salt flats, such as the Gran Atacama, are arid or semi-arid, with high evaporation and low rainfall. There we find freshwater aquifers at the foot of the mountains and brine aquifers in the center of the salt flats, both connected and in equilibrium.Brine is basically water with a high salt content, although the lithium mining industry considers it a mineral to justify its exploitation and minimize the water footprint of its activities.In addition to being essential for life, the waters of the salt flats are a heritage resource because they are very old—up to tens of thousands of years—and have been the livelihood of the indigenous people who have inhabited the Puna for thousands of years.When the mining industry moves into a salt flat, it threatens the natural balance and directly affects the relationship between water and the social environment, as well as the relationship between water and other forms of life.To extract lithium from a salt flat, the traditional procedure is to drill the salt flat, pour the brine into large ponds, wait for the water to evaporate so that the lithium concentration increases, send the lithium concentrate to an industrial plant and subject it to chemical treatment to separate the lithium from other salts and finally obtain lithium carbonate or hydroxide: a raw material used mainly in the manufacture of batteries.The continuous and large-scale extraction of brine from saline aquifers alters the natural balance of groundwater. As a result, areas that were previously filled with brine are emptied, causing freshwater from nearby aquifers to move in and occupy those spaces, becoming salinized in the process.The final processes to extract lithium carbonate and separate it from the rest of the compound also require water, which is drawn from surface or underground sources that also supply local communities.Therefore, the water used in lithium mining comes from:Underground freshwater and brine aquifers.Surface sources such as rivers and vegas (land where water accumulates). Therefore, the inherent risk of lithium mining is the overexploitation of these water sources. How much water does lithium mining use?The extraction of lithium by the methods described above involves an enormous consumption and loss of water, which is not returned to the environment because it completely used up, because its properties change, or because it is simply lost through evaporation.According to scientific data, the average water overconsumption in lithium mining is as follows:150 m3 of fresh water used to produce one ton of lithium.350 m3 of brine per ton of lithium.Between 100 and 1000 m3 of water evaporated per ton of lithium produced. To illustrate the loss of water resources in lithium mining, the water lost to evaporation is equivalent to the total water consumption of the population of Antofagasta (166,000 people) for two years. This Chilean city is located 200 km from the Salar de Atacama, where more than 90 percent of the country's lithium reserves are located.In addition to water depletion, lithium mining can also contaminate the resource by producing wastewater containing toxic substances. Our vital relationship with waterUnlike the mining industry, which sees water as just another resource to be exploited, the indigenous communities living in the area have an ancestral connection to the resource on which their economic and productive activities depend, as well as their customs, traditions and worldview.These communities must now confront the pressures on water from the advance of lithium mining, driven by outside interests.But they are doing so with courage, developing processes of defense of water and territory.Let us learn from them to defend a common good without which no way of life is possible.Learn more about the impacts of lithium mining on Andean salt flats in this StoryMap (in Spanish)Watch the recording of the webinar “Evidence of hyperconsumption of water in lithium extraction and production” (in Spanish) *Víctor Quintanilla is AIDA's Content Coordinator; David Cañas and Javier Oviedo are scientific advisors.
Read more
Learn about the negotiations to reduce maritime shipping emissions
The decarbonization of productive and economic activities is essential and urgent to address the triple crisis –climate, pollution and biodiversity loss– that the world is facing.In maritime shipping –which moves 10 billion tons of cargo each year and accounts for 2.9% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including carbon dioxide (CO2)– the global need to reduce and eventually eliminate these emissions is being addressed by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the UN specialized agency responsible for setting standards for safe, efficient and environmentally sound shipping.The move toward decarbonization is critical because without significant change, shipping emissions could increase by as much as 50% by 2050.The IMO has a revised emissions reduction strategy that was agreed in 2023 by the 175 countries that make up the organization. It is expected to reduce emissions from the sector by up to 30% by 2030, 80% by 2040 and reach net zero by around 2050. Implementation of the strategy is currently the subject of international negotiations.AIDA is participating in these negotiations as part of the Clean Shipping Coalition, an international coalition of organizations. In addition, AIDA is coordinating efforts with Ocean Conservancy and Fundación Cethus to generate advocacy with Latin American countries and to collaborate with updated technical information on the progress of the negotiations and their implications for the region.The decarbonization of global shipping and its economic impact is a very important discussion for Latin America and the Caribbean. It is necessary that all countries and economic sectors align themselves with clear targets and that all impacts are assessed equally and fairly, as well as the ways in which countries can mitigate them. Read on to learn more about this important process. What measures are being discussed to reduce emissions from maritime shipping?Negotiations are underway at the international level to select the package of measures needed to meet the 2023 targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from shipping. This package will include both technical and economic measures. Its final structure will be decided in April this year at the IMO headquarters in London, marking a global milestone in the fight against the climate crisis.Technical measures include a global fuel standard, carbon capture on ships, energy efficiency measures for the fuels used, and reductions in ship speed. They all aim to make maritime transport as efficient as possible in terms of the fuels used and to gradually phase out the use of the most polluting fuels. This means using the least amount of energy, emitting the least amount of carbon dioxide and keeping the sector in operation.In addition to technical measures, economic measures are proposed to put a price on carbon emissions from maritime transport. Increasing the efficiency of ships is expected to have not only a technological component but also a market incentive. This combination is crucial for achieving emission reduction targets, as it will provide both the public and private sectors with the necessary resources:The economic resources to invest in the new technologies, new fuels, and other investments needed for the energy transition.An economic stimulus to close the current cost gap between fossil fuels and near-zero emission clean technologies. To define a price for carbon dioxide emissions, there are two main proposals:The first has a flexible structure with respect to emissions. In its simplest form, it takes account of differences in emissions when implementing the measure. To this end, a "permissible limit" of carbon dioxide emissions is envisaged, with ships being divided into those below and those above the limit. The former could receive a financial reward, and the latter would pay a fee for the carbon dioxide emitted under a system of emission quotas. In this sense, although there is a mechanism to regulate emissions below the set limit, the tolerance of these limits offers the possibility of an accelerated reduction, which could delay the energy transition that the climate crisis requires.The second has a universal structure, i.e. a fixed price for all CO2 emissions generated by the operation of the maritime fleet. The aim is to create a market stimulus that will increase the demand for new low-emission technologies (new ships and fuels) and encourage maritime operators to purchase them in order to avoid paying a fee. This measure is expected to provide more accurate monitoring of total emissions from ships, motivate a faster and more pronounced energy transition, and collect and then redistribute a significant number of economic resources among maritime operators and countries to mitigate the disproportionate costs and negative impacts of the decarbonization process. What does decarbonizing shipping mean for Latin America and the Caribbean?According to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), Latin America and the Caribbean is one of the most vulnerable regions to climate change-related disasters, so actions aimed at achieving decarbonization targets in different sectors of the regional economy are essential to address the climate crisis.On the other hand, actions specifically aimed at decarbonizing maritime transport will have different impacts in the short, medium and long term in each of the countries of the continent. For example, the choice of one or the other proposal for the payment of a tariff for the sector's CO2 emissions - the flexible modality or the fixed price - will have a different impact in each country. What all scenarios have in common is that the region will be strongly affected by the process of decarbonizing maritime transport.In this context, it is important for countries to identify the scenarios that allow them a greater range of actions to compensate for these impacts and to ensure that the transition is equitable and fair, without leaving any country behind.In economic terms, the introduction of a universal price on CO2 emissions would allow States to receive part of the economic resources generated to compensate and mitigate the effects of decarbonization. The amounts and forms of this transfer of resources will be agreed within the IMO. The combination of more ambitious measures (technical and economic) is expected to raise up to $120 billion annually in the coming years. The flexible proposal for paying for emissions does not include mechanisms for redistributing resources, as these would go directly to ship operators and fuel producers. This would leave countries to mitigate the impact of decarbonization with their own resources.From an environmental perspective, without the incentive of a universal price, there is a risk that the flexible scheme will indirectly encourage the continued use of fuels that generate CO2 emissions, particularly in regions with limited economic resources to invest in the least polluting state-of-the-art technology. This would result in a delay in achieving emission reduction targets for the world's shipping fleet and would move countries away from meeting their climate change commitments under the IMO.In general, the costs of reducing CO2 emissions from shipping and other sectors, which are at the root of the current climate crisis, are a reality for all countries, although the impact varies by region. The active participation of Latin America and the Caribbean in the international discussions on this issue throughout 2025 is essential to ensure that the energy transition and the reduction of maritime emissions are fair and equitable. It is important that the countries of the continent adopt a position that allows them to protect their economic and environmental interests from the economic consequences of this process. If the IMO's decarbonization strategy does not live up to its ambitions, we will have a shipping industry that exacerbates the climate crisis and its impacts. The success of this strategy will be the achievement of a global consensus on environmental considerations. The equity and fairness of the transition must be one of the key elements. Recognizing the differentiated impacts of maritime decarbonization measures and their compensation, especially in the most affected countries, will ensure a triumph based on criteria of justice and environmental equity.
Read more
Biocultural Corridor: Hope for a better future for the Pantanal
By Jorge Lu Palencia and Andrea Islas López*The Pantanal is a unique and rich wetland. It integrates elements of the semi-arid Amazon Rainforest, the Atlantic Forest (humid forest), the Cerrado (tropical savannah), the Chiquitano Dry Forest and the steppe savannah of the Chaco. With an extension of almost 18 million hectares, it crosses the borders of Bolivia, Brazil and Paraguay. Its biodiversity is fundamental to water conservation, food production, climate regulation, and the life and culture of millions of people: farmers, traditional communities, quilombola communities, and indigenous peoples. The Pantanal, however, is in danger of disappearing due to devastating seasons of forest fires and other threats caused by structural deficiencies in the institutional management of the ecosystem.In 2022, civil society organizations asked the Ramsar Convention to apply the protection mechanisms for wetlands of international importance to the Pantanal, warning that the number of heat sources had increased to five times the historical average. And in 2024, they reported that the fire season again exceeded historical average conditions.A few weeks after the fires, in November 2024, the Popular Water and Climate Committees—made up of small farmers from the Paraguay River basin—gathered to celebrate nature and reaffirm their commitment to water conservation through the self-affirmation of the Paraguay River / Pantanal Biocultural Corridor.These committees have been working for more than 25 years to confront the socio-environmental threats posed by mining, projects such as waterways and hydroelectric dams, and soy and sugarcane monocultures.They represent an alternative model of ecosystem management in which communities organize themselves to protect their territory and promote sustainable practices. What does self-affirmation of the biocultural corridor mean?In environmental practice, the term “corridor” is applied to ecological corridors, whose main function is connectivity, i.e., the movement of wildlife species for shelter, feeding and reproduction, as well as plant dispersal.Adding the “biocultural” element to the corridors means thinking that human beings are part of the ecosystem, that the conservation of nature does not exclude the purpose of making possible the full life of human groups, and that culture—materialized in the diverse world views, ancestral knowledge, traditional practices and forms of organization—is a fundamental element for effective conservation of nature.The self-affirmation of the popular committees of the Pantanal is a milestone that reminds us that the protection of nature does not depend only on the action of governments but is made possible by the awareness and popular initiative of communities and peoples. It shows that the exercise of public participation rights is indispensable and fundamental for public policies that make life and socio-environmental justice possible.Biocultural corridors make it possible to integrate conservation and economic and cultural activities with ecological practices, thus promoting a more sustainable future for the communities and the Pantanal region.They represent the birth of a more legitimate and effective conservation initiative, a participatory management and an organizational system in which decisions and policies flourish from the bottom up. An alternative model to poor institutional governance In the context of the climate crisis and a political and economic system that exacerbates the threats, the devastating fire seasons in the Pantanal highlight the problems of land-use change, irresponsible use of fire for agricultural and cattle raising activities, inadequate management of resources to prevent and fight fires, and the lack of coordination and transboundary cooperation.Structural deficiencies in institutional governance have led to inadequate public policies or even to habitat loss through incentives for monocultures and extensive cattle ranching, water regulation using waterways and dams that provide ecosystem services, subsistence and culture for local communities and indigenous peoples.Faced with this panorama, the self-affirmation of the biocultural corridor emerges as an alternative model of territorial management, driven by the people as a response to the lack of effective public policies.With this model, the communities promote conscious popular education to protect water and adopt ecological agricultural practices, instead of relying on a system that favors an economy of degradation at the expense of habitat destruction. Reasons to be hopeful about preserving the PantanalThe self-affirmation of the biocultural corridor allows us to be optimistic due to:The resilience of the people of the Pantanal, which allows them to overcome the devastation and open an alternative path for the conservation of the ecosystem, with the initiative and participation of the farmers.Emancipatory awareness and action that puts life at the center, based on the rights of nature, respect for human rights, and social and environmental justice.An organization that resists and builds itself democratically, based on the Pantanal’s identity, mystique, ancestral knowledge and sustainable traditional practices.A popular and participatory management model that harmonizes conservation and integral development goals, builds bridges with other communities and indigenous peoples, and has the potential to expand as a transboundary socio-environmental governance system with an ecosystem approach.Thanks to the popular committees, the Pantanal is alive and has possibilities for a more sustainable future. The creation of the biocultural corridor is a clear sign of hope for this vast and rich wetland.This model, based on popular management and respect for nature, offers a viable alternative to the threats facing the Pantanal and is a source of inspiration for other territories in crisis on the continent.* Jorge Lu Palencia is an attorney with AIDA's Ecosystems Program; Andrea Islas López is an attorney and intern at AIDA.
Read more